TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 534X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sel for M/s.S.Raja Jeya Chandra Paul For The Respondent : Mr.Raja Karthikeyan Additional Government Pleader ORDER The prayer in the writ petition is for a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the respondent in A3/140/2017 and quash the proceedings dated 09.02.2017 issued therein. 2. Mr.Raja Karthikeyan, the learned Additional Government Pleader accepts notice for the respondents. 3. By consent of both sides, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 4. As against the order of assessment made against the petitioner, the petitioner has already approached this Court. Ultimately the issue was decided by the Division Bench of this Court dated 18.12.2015, in W.A.(MD) Nos. 1 3 7 2 to 13 7 4 of 20 1 5 in the matter of M/s.V.V.V. and Sons Edible Oil Limited v. The Commer ci a l Tax Officer 1 (FAC), Virudhunag a r . By order dated 18.12.2015, a Division Bench of this Court has passed the following orders: 8. However it is the contention of the learned Senior Counsel for the appellant that the orders of assessment passed by the respondent, are completely bereft of any application of mind and the manner in which he had dealt with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h of this Court, especially at paragraph 12, the petitioner should have approached the appellate authority by filing appeal with payment of 25% of the demand/ assessment. However, the petitioner had approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.L.P. (C) No.4609 to 4611 of 2016, challenging the order of the Division Bench dated 18.12.2015, parallely separate Writ Petition in W.P.(C) No.91 of 2015 has also been filed, wherein the statutory provision which requires compulsory deposit of 25% of the demand/assessment amount at the time of filing appeal and at the time of seeking stay from the appellate authority, have been challenged. Both the writ petition as well as the Special Leave Petition had been finally disposed of by the Hon'ble Apex Court by their Lordships' order dated 27.09.2016, wherein insofar as the writ petition filed by the petitioner under Article 32 of the Constitution of India is concerned, the following order is passed: Heard Mr.R.L.Ramani, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks leave of this Court to withdraw the writ petition to file appropriate petition before the High Court to challenge the constitutional validity of the provisions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court dated 18.12.2015, stay was granted by this Court against the original assessment order in the said writ appeals. As against the said order, the petitioner had approached the Apex Court by way of Special Leave Petition and though initially notice was issued, subsequently Special Leave Petition filed by the petitioner were disposed of by order of the Hon'ble Apex Court dated 27.09.2016. While disposing the Special Leave Petition, it was specifically directed that the petitioner can approach the appellate authority within a period of six weeks and if such an appeal is filed, the same shall be entertained and shall not be rejected on mere limitation. Pursuant to which, appeals were filed and 25% demand/assessment amount was also paid on 01.11.2016. The appeals filed by the petitioner have been entertained and it is posted for hearing on 20.02.2017. Therefore, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the order passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court is in continuation to the order passed by the Division Bench dated 18.12.2015 and whatever order passed by the Division Bench especially at paragraph 12 of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s sustainable one. 9. This Court has considered the said rival submissions made by both sides. 10. It is no doubt originally as per paragraph 12 of the order dated 18.12.2015, the Division Bench has given three directions. Firstly, appeal shall be filed by the petitioner within four weeks along with 25% of the tax demanded under the impugned assessment order. Secondly, upon filing the appeal together with 25% tax demanded already, the appellate authority shall decide the same independently and dispose of the same within a further period of three months. Till then, the petitioner have the benefit of an order of interim stay in respect of the remaining demand. In this regard, this Court finds the word 'till then' as has been employed in paragraph 12(3) of the order dated 18.12.2015, is till the disposal of the appeals by the appellate authority . As per the time schedule prescribed by the Division Bench of this Court, four weeks time was granted to file appeals and there was three months time to dispose of the appeals. Therefore, altogether there are four months period available for the purpose of deciding the appeals. Till such time stay granted would be in operation. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
